What are everyones thoughts on these two flats?
I recently got a deal worked out with my local running shop to run/race in saucony shoes exclusively this season. Anyone wear the Fastwitch or A2? Thoughts? I previously raced in the Brooks T5…which one is more similar?
I race–and do just about all of my training in–the Saucony Fastwitch shoes; granted I weigh in around 145-150 and am biomechanically quite efficient, I find the shoes to be perfect for my body/foot type. I have a fairly flat foot, so I am a fan of the minimal medial posting on the Fastwitch shoes, and find the upper very comfortable (both with socks–Smartwool only–and without). The shoe is plenty light to race sprint tris, olympics, etc in, but also has plenty of cushioning (for me, mind you) for a 12-15 mile long run, and presumably, for marathon racing, etc. They have also treated me well for 2+ hr snowshoe runs. All in all, a solid shoe.
*disclaimer–I have never had the A2 on, so cannot give you a comparison. My apologies.
The Fastwitch 1 and 2 used to come in two versions … the Speed and Endurance. The new 3, from what I was told by the Saucony guys at the Boston expo last year, basically is the Endurance, so it has a little more beef and support. The Speed went away and was replaced by the even lighter A2.
I’ve used the Fastwitch 1 and 2, but not the 3. I like racing in both. But with the Zoot Gu sponsorship last year I got some of the new Zoot shoes and have been racing in them since.
I’d say if your focus is shorter distance stuff and you can handle it, go with the A2. Longer stuff, get the Fastwitch.
Oh, and I run in all Saucony stuff other than racing with the Zoots …
They are totally different shoes!
The Fastwitch 3 is a lightweight trainer and NOT a racing flat. Has a midfoot support and rearfoot posting (dual density foam). Great shoe.
The A2 has absolutely nothing - also a great shoe, especially for running barefoot with a great sockliner. Actually has lots of cushioning for a “flat”, but no support at all. I’m a pretty efficient runner, but also with a mild “flat foot”. I can run a 10K with the A2s, but would not train in them or run a marathon in them. I’m sure many could.
Thanks for the input. It seems like the A2 will be more of my type of shoe. I mainly race Oly’s with the a 70.3 or two each season along with plenty of 5ks on off weekends. So I’m looking for something light and fast. I’ve raced in the Brooks T5 for two marathons and was fine in those, so I can handle the minimalist type shoe for long distances. I also never train in racing flats, so the A2 would only be used for racing. Sounds like both are great shoes though and I look forward to testing them out.
I raced Brooks T4 at 5k distance and have switched to Saucony TypeA2… The A2 has has the same great neutral feel and snug like fit, but feels a slightly more rigid in the medial area which seems to help keep my push off from getting sloppy at the end of a race when I am picking up the pace. The Type A2 is much easier to get on T2 also. I use the fastwitch 3 for training in 45+ min runs.
SCSQ
California
While the Fastwitch 3 may not be a racing flat in the traditional sense, it is a racing shoe…it weighs in under 8 ounces. I would use the FT at longer races (half, iron), but also would consider it for an olymp. I’ve raced in both shoes. I have a pretty wide foot. The thing I don’t like about the A2 is that it has material near the forefoot that rubs…so I can’t wear the shoe for anything over a 5k w/o socks. Just my .02.
Too bad they stopped making the A.
I’m no light weight and I love mine. I used a pair at Kona and they were great.
I have a pair of Fasttwitch 2s that were purchased on sale. They are nice, but not as springy a forefoot as the A.
I’sm in between these 2 shoes as well. I recently went to see my podiatrist and he explained to me the bio mechanics of running and how that applies to my foot type. I have a flat foot and weigh 158lbs but i am somewhat of an efficient runner. We did a plaster mold casting for orthotics which should arrive next week. He explained to me 2 KEY things to look for when selecting a shoe. 1 being that it had minimal twist/torsion (kinda like figure eight) and the seond bieng that the midfoot portion of the shoe didnt collape to allow the midfoot to lock out during the stride.
Thoughts?
Thoughts: none really. Pretty standard advice and probably spot on.
The A2 does NOT meet these qualifications though 
and most racing flats and neutral, lightweight trainers won’t either. A few will (i.e. the NB 903). Does that mean you shouldn’t be in these shoes? No way to tell without an exam and only you and another have that info …
Given that there isn’t a running store in the bay area that carries either of these 2 shoes where i can try them on. Will the Fastwitch have more of a rigid midfoot than the A2?
Yes, the Fastwitch3 has a midfoot “bridge” and mild medial rearfoot post, yet still lightweight. A good shoe, although the outsole is not very durable.
I can’t believe a LRS in the bay area doesn’t have these? We have several here that do.
Thanks for the info!! Much appreciated!
Ive called everywhere from north bay to east bay to south bay and no one carries a racing flat (i.e. brooks ST, Saucony type A2’ etc…)
Ive seen the Asics DStrainers but that’s about as close to anything i can find.
Online shopping is what i do…